During the past year I have found various websites which are marketing the DMIT-test (= the 'Dermatoglyphics Multiple Intelligence Test'). It's a test which is build on an (old) theory by Dr. Howard Gardner - who argued in 1983 that the concept of intelligence as traditionally defined in psychometrics (IQ tests) does not sufficiently describe the wide variety of cognitive abilities humans display..

During the past years this method came into the hands of a few marketeers, who presented this method in: China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand. Most of these websites are developed in Asia.

A few examples (15 websites based in 7 countries - alphabetic ranked):

- Based in Malaysia & Singapore:m.adrc.sg

- Based in Malaysia, Singapore & the UK:www.brain-childlearning.com

- Based in India:www.brain-mark.com

- Based in India:www.brain-secrets.com

- Based in Malaysia:www.brainchecker.com.my

- Based in Singapore:easybrainmethods.com

- Based in India:www.empowermind.in

- Based in Malaysia:genebook.com.my

- Based in Malaysia:www.genecode.com.my

- Based in Thailand:www.inborn-intel.com/en/

- Based in the US & Taiwanwww.itellusa.com

- Based in India:www.mind-tech.in

- Based in Malaysia:mydna.com.my/en/

- Based in India:www.thumbrule.in

- Based in India:9jivan.com

One of the commercial slogans is:

But does the test really do what is says? Is it really possible to 'assess' IQ talents from the individual tips of our fingers?

(Earlier discussions at the PI-forum indicates that the theory also appears to be that a low AtD-angle correlates with higher intelligence)

Here's a quick visual impression of the steps taken :http://www.genecode.com.my/new/derma_assessment.html

Finally, here is a Youtube presentation of a Thumbrule-DMIT analysis sample-report:

And the sample-report is also available here as a document:http://www.scribd.com/doc/34572277/Sample-report-of-Thumbrule-DMIT-Dermatoglyphics-multiple-intelligence-test

Plus a sample report for another person:http://www.scribd.com/doc/40156801/ThumbRule-Sample-Report

NOTICE: The following info has been edited - initially PROF. ROGER LIN was not mentioned:

Who designed the 'Dermatoglyphic Multiple Intelligence Test'?

Basically, the Thumbrul DMIT-test can be recognized as a commercial spin-off from the work of Professor Roger Lin. More info about the history of his work is available here:

http://www.brain-childlearning.com/partner.html (this website is also listed above!)http://www.brain-child.co.cc/2010/10/profesor-roger-lin.html (Indonesian language, but there are multiple translation buttons available)

Professor Roger Lin from China:

Another person who is said to have played a role in the development of this product is Mary Lai from Taiwan - it appears that she sort of 'designed' the model describing the connection between the fingers and the brain lobes, see: http://www.mme.com.tw/page11.php

Mary Lay (MMEA - Mind Measurement Education Association)

PHOTO SOURCE: www.ibmbs.com

Last edited by Martijn (admin) on Sat Jul 28, 2018 4:07 pm; edited 34 times in total

Now, I think the presentations are quite impressive.But what do we really think about this DMIT test?

I could describe my opinion as follows:

I am sceptical about various elements in the Thumbrule DMIT-test. Just to mention a few points:

1 - The DMIT method suggests that each finger is connected with a brain lobe, but I think there is no direct evidence for such a specified theory at all. On the contrary: it is a fact that all fingers are connected with for example the motor cortex (which is in the frontal lobe) AND the somatosensory cortex (which is in the parietal lobe) - and I am quite sure that there are likewise multiple-connections with the other lobes.

2 - The AtD-angle is no reliable indicactor for IQ, nor the efficiency of school performances. Actually, the words 'effective learner' and 'affective learner' are rather abstract concepts (which might only have linguistic value).

3 - For me... it is actually quite shocking that the commercial marketeers even appear to use UNETHICAL SUGGESTIONS to market this speculative DMIT 'product'. For example, the following website suggests that DMIT is 'needed' because of the many suicides due to exam stress:

See: http://www.mind-tech.in/dermatoglyphic_multiple.html

"Need of DMIT in India

• 12,000+ studentscommit suicides in India every year due to exam related stress • Parental and peer pressureare prime causes for such high number of suicides • DMIT can provide crucial inputs for student counseling and guidance"

Your experience/opinion is welcome: what is your thought?Does anybody have any experience with this method?

Last edited by Martijn (admin) on Tue Dec 14, 2010 4:36 pm; edited 1 time in total

See the post from october 14, 2010:http://www.sillybeliefs.com/blog016.html#blog016-7

Quote from the report:

"So in conclusion, DMIT is most likely a scam because:

• There is no scientific evidence that it works (1)• They tell blatant lies in its promotion (2)• They make misleading claims (3)• The provide testimonials, not evidence (4)• They speak in the language of pseudoscience (5)• Even the affluent and often gullible West hasn't accepted it (6)"

PS. In my second post in this topic I have independently presented 3 points of critical evaluation... which sort of relate to the 6 conclusions in the 'Silly Beliefs' report

More details about the DMIT-franchisee model are available in this 33 pages powerpoint presentation:http://www.scribd.com/doc/40155049/D-M-I-T-Concept-PPT-for-Franchisee

NOTICE:- On page 19 is suggested that DMIT provides a method to assess IQ, EQ, AQ and CQ... but on page they suggest that IQ is an 'incomplete tool'.

...Intellectually, this DMIT concept looks like a complete chaos... because they are suggesting that the method identifies multiple forms of intelligence, but basically the concepts of AQ (Adversity Intelligence Quotient) and CQ (Coaching Intelligence Quotient) do not related at all to Gardner's model of mulitiple intelligences, etc, etc..

(Here you can read what AQ and CQ really concern: http://www.paradigm21.com/eq/eq.html )

So, basically... it appears to me that DMIT was build with some theoretical 'copy-and-pasting' combined with some statistical 'hocus-pocus' ...

Various studies have indicated that there is indeed a link between the AtD angle and intelligence, but one should be aware that most of these studies were focussed on the hands of people who are featured with a low IQ (including: mentally retarded subjects and/or people who have Down syndrome).

One should also be are that the IQAtD-angle can vary from 25o to 75o (values outside this range are very rare). Which also implicates that principally these can all be found among invididuals of high IQ and low IQ.

However...

The following studies present strong evidence that the AtD angle correlates with IQ:- [2010] Axial triradius as a preliminary diagnostic tool in patients of mental retardation- [1996] Quantitative dermatoglyphic analysis in persons with superior intelligence

Plus the following Chinese report:- [2006] Report on study of multivariate intelligence

Wow!Wonderful home work Martijin!I appreciate and thank you for your efforts in this regard for providing such a rich knowledge on the subject for us. Though I have seen a few of websites earlier among the mentioned by you but your way of data collecting, editing and later presenting is marvelous. Full marks!

Albert Einstein would probably not have agreed, since his intelligence had manifested at a very young age (even before he could speak!). And the truth is... that modern science today learn us that intelligence is for a large part inborn and inherited.

For example, Wikipediia reports:

"Estimates in the academic research of the heritability of IQ have varied from below 0.5 to a high of 0.9."

I can understand why the DMIT marketeers decided to suggest that 'genius' takes a 99% effort... because basically the implication of this is that using the DMIT test would probably add to your chances to develop the intelligence of a child in an efficient manner.

But the truth behind my wikipedia quote is that for a large part parents can not 'guide' the intelligence of their child... simply because 'genius' is for a very large part talent only - and in that perspective DMIT's claim about effort-vs-talent is not realistic at all!

Another example of ... DMIT rhetorics - while the scientfic facts tell a completely different story!!

Anyway, the Malaysian video is quite interesting and illustrative how the DMIT marketeers in Asia have done their part really quite well (a large part of the video is illustrated with English language tekst - but you will need to use the full screen mode to be able to read)...

More DMIT videos in various languages are available here:http://wn.com/Dermatoglyphics

But I also want to recommend this video where Howard Garnder (the man who invented the concept of MI: 'Multiple Intelligences') explains how he arrived at the MI-theory of multiple intelligences. Gardner describes in this video very explicitely how this theory actually much more relates to 'talents', and not IQ...!!! Howard Gardner's choice to speak about 'multiple intelligences' was basically of a marketing related decision for his book to be published.

So it is VERY IMPORTANT to notice that from a fundamental point of view... Gardner's MI-theory does not relate to IQ at all! And after observing this, one could argue that all assocations between the MI-theory and IQ... are by fact misleading!

In this perspective it is important to notice DMIT does claim to measure EQ, AQ, CQ, and IQ! And while the DMIT marketeers are describing their product as 'scientific', I think my observations have illustrated with quite a few details that the essential scientific facts which are mentioned in the DMIT product description... tell quite a different story.

I think it is therefore 'fair' to conclude:The DMIT marketeers should not have associated the DMIT test with the traditional IQ concept.

(And I am quite sure that the marketeers would not have made this basic mistake if they had studied the essential elements of Howard Gardner MI-theory properly)

NOTICE: the Wikipedia page about Gardner's MI-theory informs us that Gardner even denied the existence of intelligence as traditionally understood!!!

PS. I don't expect that many academic psychologists will ever accept DMIT as a scientifically valid- nor a reliable product... simply because their is no direct evidence at all which confirms that the product does what it is described to do.

The associations with IQ appear to be rhetorics only. And the model of the fingerprints & the brain lobes connection appears to be a speculative theoretic construction - because I have never ever seen any scientifically confirmed link between any single finger(print) and any well-defined specific 'talent'.

Anyway, if you have a different opion... you are welcome to express it here!!

“The associations with IQ appear to be rhetoric only. And the model of the fingerprints & the brain lobes connection appears to be a speculative theoretic construction - because I have never ever seen any scientifically confirmed link between any single finger (print) and any well-defined specific 'talent'.

Anyway, if you have a different opinion... you are welcome to express it here!!”

You are in this way totally disapproving the basic concept of dermatoglyphic study of fingerprints laid down by Dr. Cunning or Richard Unger.

According to them the highest rank here at the fingertip of right Apollo finger denotes creativity or some kind of talent. The same is true when a few vertical lines are found on first tip of the little finger, but of course not well-defined specific 'talent' as I usually say that no sign on the palm or fingertip is absolute in itself.

In Dermatoglyphic study we can easily recognized whether the person has true creative abilities or not. You know that different types of patterns on different fingers denote different things. Whorls and peacock eye stand the highest value on the fingertips so they are ranked the highest and therefore on the right ring finger or on both the ring fingers denote not only the mere appearance, presence, interest or inclination towards the artistic field but they are efficient, talented and powerful masters of creativity with great concentration in particular field. It shows efficient and powerful creativity as his Life Purpose, Life Theme.

The Apollo Line indicates capabilities or possibility of accompanying a great deal indeed, but, the field in which the subject will be at ease and could give best result will be shown by the Chirognomy study of the subject; which will tell that what are the forces behind this talent which will direct or guide the ability in producing the result. But, dear Martijin whorl or peacock pattern there at fingertips do indicate some ‘talent’.

“The associations with IQ appear to be rhetoric only. And the model of the fingerprints & the brain lobes connection appears to be a speculative theoretic construction - because I have never ever seen any scientifically confirmed link between any single finger (print) and any well-defined specific 'talent'.

Anyway, if you have a different opinion... you are welcome to express it here!!”

You are in this way totally disapproving the basic concept of dermatoglyphic study of fingerprints laid down by Dr. Cunning or Richard Unger.

According to them the highest rank here at the fingertip of right Apollo finger denotes creativity or some kind of talent. The same is true when a few vertical lines are found on first tip of the little finger, but of course not well-defined specific 'talent' as I usually say that no sign on the palm or fingertip is absolute in itself....

Dear Parender,

Sorry, so far I have not been able to recognize any direct connection between the DMIT (1) method and Richard Unger's approach (2), nor Harold Cummin's approach (3).

And in that perspective I am wondering what you actually have in mind with what you described as 'the basic concept of dermatoglyphic study of fingerprints'?

For your info:

Ad 1 - DMIT is a method build on the speculation that there is a connection between the fingerprints of individual fingers & the brain lobes; but I am not aware that Unger, nor Cummins, are making a likewise connection.

Ad 2 - Richard Unger indeed uses a fingerprint ranking method for life purpose & diagnostic issues, but I am not aware that he as well makes the connection between fingers & brain lobes.

Ad 3 - Regarding Cummin's approach - who indeed used his 'fingerprint tree' to describe the variations among fingerprints - he never used the 'fingerprint tree' for diagnostic issues. And I am also not aware that he made any connection between fingerprints & brain lobes. Cummins actually e.g. described with many details that 'whorls' are typical for the primate hand, and 'feeble minded' have a greater number of large patterns & composites - which indicates that it is actually rather speculative to claim that Cummins work can be recognized as supporting Richard Unger's approach.

So, I think you completely misunderstood my comment - by making assocations between my comments about DMIT with multiple other unrelated methods. While in this topic... I only talked about the fundamentals of the DMIT.

PS. I hope you will explain the concept that you have in mind ('the basic concept of dermatoglyphic study of fingerprints').

Last edited by Martijn (admin) on Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:51 pm; edited 2 times in total

[justify]My plain answer is no because if a person’s fingerprints denote a Mentor, an Artist, a Healer, a big Shot, the person will definitely be an intelligent person you see. But, the other chierological marks would have to confirm it. The successful reading of dermatoglyphics study depends on the study of chierology. They both were made for each other. Even if we see some especial mark on fingertips, we would have to get it confirmed somewhere on the palm before reaching to a conclusion.

Yes, the ATD angle correlates with intelligence.

I mistook your following saying -

“The associations with IQ appear to be rhetorics only. And the model of the fingerprints & the brain lobes connection appears to be a speculative theoretic construction - because I have never ever seen any scientifically confirmed link between any single finger (print) and any well-defined specific 'talent',”

–for “fingerprints do not show any well defined specific substances that the person has”.

You did not mean that. You were talking about “specific talent”.

My belief was and is that the Fingerprints make us able to extract information about the ‘substances’ that the person has; but not “well defined specific talent.” I think you would have followed my idea. Now, I have no hesitation to agree with you.

“The associations with IQ appear to be rhetorics only. And the model of the fingerprints & the brain lobes connection appears to be a speculative theoretic construction - because I have never ever seen any scientifically confirmed link between any single finger (print) and any well-defined specific 'talent',”

–for “fingerprints do not show any well defined specific substances that the person has”.

You did not mean that. You were talking about “specific talent”.

My belief was and is that the Fingerprints make us able to extract information about the ‘substances’ that the person has; but not “well defined specific talent.” I think you would have followed my idea. Now, I have no hesitation to agree with you.

Parender Sethihttp://www.palmistryforyou.in/

Hello Parender Sethi,

Thanks for confirming that you sort of misread my quote .

Yes, before your feedback I had been talking about the DMIT method only - one should not read my comments out of context: I was not referring to fingerprints in general!

So, great to know that you can actually support my comment & analysis (yes I made my comments more specified - to the DMIT product - than you initially assumed).

And again... my fundamental problem with the DMIT product is that it claims to be constructed with scientific findings, but there are no scientific findings available which confirm that a single finger (print) provides info 'talent' (nor brain lobes, IQ, EQ, etc.) - but DMIT does make those claims.

Richard doesn't make those claims: he doesn't claim that his method is scientifically validated, and his method uses a completely different approach because it works with the profile of all 10 fingers (prints) together.

I am catching up after being away various times during the last 6 weeks. Thanks for your input Parender, and for your replies Martijn. I too had misunderstood some things & it has helped me to understand what Martijn was saying. However I still have a lot of reading & understanding to do on this topic! Great stuff!

Last edited by Lynn on Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:38 am; edited 1 time in total

regarding the video that Martijn posted on 4th january, about multiple intelligence.

This is interesting to me. At 11 years of age I questioned the whole concept of IQ tests, after passing my "11-plus" exam at primary school, based on IQ tests. I scored 96 or 98% so I passed thru to Grammar School. But I never thought I was more intelligent than some friends who didn't pass the exam! We have different ways of thinking, some more academic or creative, some better at abstract thoughts & imaginative ability.

At some stage I discovered that apparently my IQ was high enough to get into MENSA. I think I scored 136 in IQ test. (is that high? maybe I remembered it wrong, and maybe my brain isn't as good as it used to be! but am happy to re-take it if anyone has a link to a free IQ test).

Since age 11 I have always argued that I just happen to be good at IQ tests (which seem to be based basically on maths, some language ability, & recognising patterns), but it does not make me more intelligent than the next person.

Now I know palmistry, I'd say that IQ tests seem ideally suited to my short (ends under Saturn) straight headline. It's a particular way of thinking. And "recognising patterns" is a great "way of thinking" for analysing hands!

Anyway, it is interesting to watch this video. I agree with this guy that there are multiple 'types of intelligence'!

Lynn wrote:... At some stage I discovered that apparently my IQ was high enough to get into MENSA. I think I scored 136 in IQ test. (is that high? maybe I remembered it wrong, and maybe my brain isn't as good as it used to be! but am happy to re-take it if anyone has a link to a free IQ test).

Since age 11 I have always argued that I just happen to be good at IQ tests (which seem to be based basically on maths, some language ability, & recognising patterns), but it does not make me more intelligent than the next person....

Hi Lynn,

Yes, to join Mensa... "you need an IQ of at least 130".

Only about 2% of people is able to score above 130 on any calibrated IQ test.

So, if your memory is correct about the 136 score (in the past), I think you are overestimating the capacities of many others at least a little bit... because far most people will never manage to score above 130 on any IQ test.

By the way, many people over-estimate the capacities of others, especially regarding those people who show 'stronger verbal skills'... but often these skills were developed to compensate weaker skills, etc.

Maybe you will enjoy to read this article: http://abagond.wordpress.com/2008/07/08/iq/

Martijn (admin) wrote:....if your memory is correct about the 136 score (in the past), I think you are overestimating the capacities of many others at least a little bit... because far most people will never manage to score above 130 on any IQ test.

but that is my point! I don't think I am over-estimating others abilities, I think they have a different type of intelligence!

maybe my memory is not correct? I should do an online IQ test to check what it is now.I read the article, so if I remembered correctly my IQ is about the same as Arnold Schwarzenegger & Al Gore. I need to re-take that test! Hasta la vista baby.

Last edited by Lynn on Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:15 pm; edited 1 time in total

PS Some interesting points on the discussion after the article you linked to Martijn. http://abagond.wordpress.com/2008/07/08/iq/sorry if I am off topic, none of my posts so far relate to dermatoglyphics in relation to IQ.

very interesting topic!

Last edited by Lynn on Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:00 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : 'off topic')

If you have a half hour of spare time, you can try this online test at the official mensa website...

https://www.mensa.org/workout.php

(Not an official test, but it should provide you an interesting impression)

PS. Lynn, regarding... (yes, we are off-topic) ... the 'responses' that you quoted are at best partly true, but some are not much more than rethorics only (based on general prejudgements regarding the content of IQ tests; because the content & types of skills tested actually varies in various tests!).

Anyway, in my hand research studies I don't focuss on the results of IQ tests (instead I am using highest education levels, etc.).